Symmetry conjecture for graphs with edge-disjoint cycles
Let be a graph, and let denote its total oriented chromatic quasisymmetric function. Say that cycles of are edge-disjoint when no two cycles share an edge. Symmetry conjecture for edge-disjoint cycles. If no two cycles of share an edge, then is symmetric. The preceding theorem proves the corresponding identity for trees, while the conjectured extension to graphs whose cycles are pairwise edge-disjoint is not resolved in the supplied text.
References
Primary source
Laura Colmenarejo and Ian Klein, “The Total Chromatic Quasisymmetric Functions of a Graph”, arXiv:2601.23170 (2026).
Progress summary
A reader-written calculation claims a six-vertex graph with one cycle disproves the conjecture, but the claim has not been independently checked.
Colmenarejo and Klein state the symmetry conjecture in their January 2026 paper: edge-disjoint cycles should force symmetry of the total oriented chromatic quasisymmetric function. The paper presents this extension beyond trees as unresolved.
Known results
- For a tree with , Colmenarejo and Klein prove , hence symmetry (2026).
Posted attempt
A reader-written argument claims a complete counterexample: a connected graph on vertices with one -cycle and two leaves, satisfying the hypothesis. It reports unequal coefficients and , so symmetry would fail. The calculation has not been independently verified.
Current status (as of August 2026): The tree case is proved, while the edge-disjoint-cycle conjecture has an unverified claimed counterexample and therefore remains mathematically unsettled.
Sources
Solutions 1
CounterexampleThis solution needs a summarySee full solution
The conjecture is false, already for a connected graph with six vertices and just one cycle.
In Colmenarejo and Klein, Conjecture 3.14, the function in question is
where consists of all acyclic orientations, is a proper coloring by positive integers, and an oriented edge is an ascent when . We use this orientation sum, not the distinct variant that sums over vertex labelings.
Take and
Here denotes the undirected edge . Thus form a four-cycle, and are leaves attached to , respectively. The only cycle is the four-cycle, so the hypothesis that no two cycles share an edge is satisfied.
We will prove
These two monomials are interchanged by , so the unequal coefficients disprove symmetry.
1. Counting orientations with one ascent
For a proper coloring , let be the number of ascents around the fixed direction
Among all orientations of the six edges, exactly six have one ascent: choose the ascending edge, and orient each other edge from its larger-colored endpoint to its smaller-colored endpoint.
An orientation is cyclic precisely when the four-cycle is coherently directed. Therefore, among those six orientations, exactly one must be discarded if or , and none otherwise. In the discarded orientation both leaf edges point in the descending direction. Consequently, for a fixed color multiplicity profile, its coefficient at is
where counts proper colorings with that profile and counts those with .
2. The number of proper colorings
For either profile, . It suffices to count the profile , in which colors occur twice: swapping colors gives a bijection to the other profile.
If the four cycle colors are distinct, the two leaf colors must be . For either ordering of these leaf colors, inclusion-exclusion gives permissible cycle permutations. This contributes .
If exactly three cycle colors occur, the repeated color is either or and occupies opposite vertices. Fix that repeated color. If the other doubled color is absent from the cycle, there are four cycle arrangements, each with one leaf extension. Otherwise, one of colors is absent. For each of these two choices there are four cycle arrangements: two have one leaf extension and two have two leaf extensions. This contributes
If exactly two cycle colors occur, they must be the alternating colors . There are two cycle arrangements and two orders for leaf colors , contributing . Thus .
3. The exceptional cycle colorings
If a color repeats on the four-cycle, it repeats at opposite vertices. Each two-edge route between those vertices has one ascent and one descent, so .
Thus requires all four colors to be distinct. The ordered cycle colors must be one of the four cyclic rotations of . The following table lists every possible leaf-color pair for these rotations.
| Cycle colors | Profile | Profile |
|---|---|---|
| or | ||
Hence for the first profile and for the second.
The graph automorphism reverses the direction of the four-cycle and preserves each color multiplicity profile. It takes to , so for each profile.
The two coefficients are therefore
They are different. Thus is not symmetric, although has only one cycle, disproving Conjecture 3.14.